Immigration — cancellation of removal — moral turpitude

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Civil

Immigration — cancellation of removal — moral turpitude

Where the BIA made no finding that an alien seeking cancellation of removal committed a crime of moral turpitude, the denial was erroneous.

“Instead, the Board moved straight to the second Silva-Trevino step and found that Sanchez ‘did not meet his bur-den of proving … that his criminal conviction is not a CIMT’ because he ‘has not established that he was not convicted under a portion of the statute that does not qualify.’ Again, it seems that the Board reached this conclusion because it found the case chronology printout inconclusive regarding Sanchez’s charge. But if the record of conviction does not answer the question, it does not follow that the alien has failed to carry his burden and the inquiry is over. It only means that the adjudicator should exercise its discretion to consider additional evidence (or else explain why it declined to do so). Only if the matter is still inconclusive after that step—perhaps because the evidence is closely balanced, or the ad-judicator finds that the alien’s account lacks credibility—will the burden of proof come into play. But just because Sanchez may ultimately lose in the event of a tie does not mean that the Board can end the inquiry early.”

Petition Granted.

13-2653 Sanchez v. Holder

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Flaum, J.